Epstein Data Wiki

Nathan Myhrvold

Properties2
tagsperson, intellectual-ventures, microsoft, little-saint-james, correspondence, modernist-cuisine, usvi-litigation
aliasesMyhrvold, Nathan, Nathan P. Myhrvold, Myrhvold, Mhyrvold, Mryvold, Myhvrold, nathanm, nmyhrvold, nathan myhrvold

74 min read

Named on the documents as”Nathan Myhrvold” in the sender field of his own messages and in Epstein’s To: line; nathanm as a bare handle in the To: or Cc: field of 157 documents, nearly all of them Epstein’s messages, the address beside it barred or blank; nmyhrvold on six of his own; “Intellectual Ventures Myhrvold Nathan” where his office’s address book supplies the display name; and, misspelt by the people writing to and about him, “Myrhvold”, “Mhyrvold”, “Mryvold”, “Myhvrold” and eleven further forms123
What a document says he is”Nathan Myhrvold / Founder, CEO” over www.intellectualventures.com in his own signature block; “former Microsoft executive Nathan Myhrvold” in the Vanity Fair profile of Epstein held in his files; “bill gates right hand , and food guru” in Epstein’s own description of him to a third party456
Range of documents cited here7 November 2002 to 25 July 202378
Size of the file2,105 documents on the exact phrase "Nathan Myhrvold"; 2,600 over the union of seventeen forms established below. The surname alone is not a safe key and the forename is useless: "Myhrvold" returns 2,224 and carries one other person; "Nathan" returns 7,733, of which 5,628 have nothing to do with him92
How much of it is his own writing331 of the 2,105 — 16% — carry his name in the top-level sender field of the document’s own first sheet, under the rule published below. Those 331 resolve to between 221 and 237 distinct messages. He writes across eleven calendar years, 2009 to 2019, and the peak is 2014110
Covered elsewhere on this wikiThe 26 August 2009 message about a physicist’s job offers, on which he is a named recipient and to which he wrote the longest reply: Lisa Randall and Elon Musk. The 7 October 2017 day on which Epstein saw him at 2pm and the UN General Assembly President at 1pm: Miroslav Lajčák
Not established hereAny payment, investment, fee or donation between them in either direction; that he set foot on Little Saint James; that he attended the January 2011 science weekend he was invited to; anything about his conduct beyond what the documents cited here record

Nathan Myhrvold, the first chief technology officer of Microsoft and the founder and chief executive of Intellectual Ventures, is one of the largest correspondents in the released Epstein files and one of the longest-running. The file is not a file of press clippings: across all 2,105 documents the standard news markers fire on five, and every one of those five is an article about Epstein in which Myhrvold’s name occurs once, in a list of dinner guests. What the file holds instead is some two hundred and thirty messages he wrote to Jeffrey Epstein between August 2009 and March 2019, and several hundred more that Epstein wrote to him, most of them addressed to a bare handle, the address beside it barred or blank. The correspondence outlasts every other technologist’s in the release. It begins five weeks after Epstein’s release from jail, continues through his own divorce, on which Epstein gave him unsolicited advice about protecting assets, and is still running four months before Epstein’s arrest. Twice, in 2011, he told Epstein he was on his boat beside the island and was heading over. In 2015 Epstein used him to get a former White House Counsel in front of him in Seattle. In 2019 a federal complaint recorded that his name had been offered, in settlement talks, as an alternative to another man’s, and that the woman making the allegation, shown photographs of both, said it was not him. Nothing on this page is a finding of wrongdoing. He is not accused of anything, and no document read for this page suggests he knew of any offence.

Identification: a name people mistype, and a handle that is not a name

The forename is useless and the surname is nearly safe. "Nathan" returns 7,733 documents, 5,628 of them outside the full-name set, and no figure on this page is keyed to it. "Myhrvold" returns 2,224, of which 119 lie outside the 2,105-document "Nathan Myhrvold" set; those 119 were opened and 118 are this subject: office traffic addressed to “Intellectual Ventures Myhrvold Nathan”, index rows reading “Myhrvold, Nathan”, schedule lines and press clippings. The one that is not is disclosed rather than counted: a Technology Review item bylined “Conor Myhrvold”, a different person, reached by the surname alone.911

Fifteen damaged forms add documents the correct spelling cannot reach, and each figure counts documents, not pages or mentions:

formdocumentsoutside the "Nathan Myhrvold" setwhat it is
"Nathan Myhrvold"2,105(base)
"nathanm"170159the e-mail handle
"Myhrvold" (surname alone)2,224119
"Myrhvold"9680h↔r transposed
"Mhyrvold"7171h↔y transposed
"Mryvold"2828h dropped and y/r transposed
"yhrvold"2513leading M lost
"Myhryold"109v→y
"Myhvrold"66r↔v transposed
"Myhvold"63r dropped
"Myhrvol"83final d lost
"Myrvold"62h dropped
"Mvhrvold"82y→v
"Myhtvold"22r→t
"Myhrvoid"22l→i
"Mybrvold"11h→b
"Myhrvodl"11l↔d transposed
"Mhyrvoid"11transposition and l→i
union of the above2,600

Four of those are transpositions, and transposition is a different fault from the ones this desk has been cataloguing. The desk’s ocr_variants.py works by substitution, one letter replaced by another that looks like it, and generates none of the seventeen forms in the table above. A transposition swaps two letters with each other, and no substitution table can produce it. It is also human rather than optical. mhyrvold occurs inside Epstein’s own lower-case sentences, “nathan mhyrvold . long time buddy.” and “tell him to ask nathan mhyrvold.. or bin salman”, and inside his staff’s: “For breakfast with Nathan Mhyrvold on Monday are you good with bagels, smoked salmon, cream cheese, dill and tomato platter type thing”, “LM for Nathan Mhyrvold…Claudia hopes he can call you back shortly”. myrhvold likewise: “nathan myrhvold will be with me on fri„ want to join”, “Jeffrey is meeting with Nathan Myrhvold soon and that always puts him in a good mood”. These are people mistyping a hard Norwegian surname, not a scanner misreading a glyph, and the proof is that the forename beside them is spelled correctly every time.212

Mryvold is Epstein’s own habitual misspelling and it was not in the desk’s table. All 28 of its documents are outside the base set and all 28 are copies of one numbered list in his files, “4. nathan mryvold, hillis, lloyd, jes staley, jamie dimon. henry jarecki,”, the same “core participants” list quoted at Lisa Randall. Eighteen further forms were probed and returned nothing; the nulls are in the footnote, because a null is a measurement.2

Every one of the 495 documents the union adds to the base set was opened and its matched passage read, not a sample. 494 are this subject. One is not, the Technology Review byline named above. The dominant contaminant class other pages have found, an English word colliding with the name, does not exist here: “Myhrvold” is not a word.11

nathanm is a token, and the census says the token is him

The single largest gain is not a misspelling at all. "nathanm" returns 170 documents, 159 of them outside the base set, and they matter more than their number suggests: 157 of the 159 carry the handle as the value of a top-level To: or Cc: field, and on those sheets the address beside it is barred or blank, so the full name never prints and no full-name search can reach them. 151 of the 159 carry Jeffrey Epstein in the top-level sender field. They run from November 2010 to July 2018 and they are, overwhelmingly, Epstein’s own short messages to him: “come visit”, “progress?”, “time passes quickly”, “still kicking?”, “how we doing:?”, “when do i get to see you again?”

A bare handle is a token and a token is not a person, so all 159 were read. Four things settle it. One, a sheet read at the image prints To: nathanm < followed by a solid black bar, above Epstein’s message of 7 November 2013; the handle is a display name, not a fragment. Two, two documents carry both nathanm in the To: field and the surname in the body: Epstein’s message of 16 July 2013 reads “saw todays ny times article. . whoops- careful we dont want trayvon myhrvold”. Three, the body of another opens with the forename, “nathan , when you next come to ny, i think you would really enjoy spending time with bam[aby]”, and copies Barnaby Marsh on it. Four, the content matches: nathanm is asked about Paul Allen, told about Bill Gates, thanked for “letting me attend kirkland kinder garden” (Intellectual Ventures is in Kirkland, Washington), and answered, on the sheets where the reply survives, by messages whose sender field reads “Nathan Myhrvold”. The two documents that are not messages are forensic extracts of a Mac address book in which nathanm is the stored first-name field of a contact, and they are disclosed rather than counted as correspondence.3

How much of this file is his own writing

A count of documents naming a person is not a count of what that person did. The rule below is stated completely enough to be reproduced, and a reader who follows only what is printed here must reach 331.

The sender rule. For each of the 2,105 documents take the document’s own first sheet (the row with the lowest page_number for that identifier) and its first sixteen non-blank lines. Find the first line whose start matches a sender label, over a nineteen-form set covering the damaged renderings of From: this extraction produces (Fran, Frorn, Fromm, Prom and Front among them), the label followed by a colon, semicolon or full stop; a label standing alone on its line with no punctuation also counts. The sender value is the remainder of that line if non-empty; otherwise the next non-blank line, unless that line itself begins with a header label (the sender set plus To, Cc, Bcc, Sent, Date, Subject, Importance, Attachments and their damaged forms), in which case the value is absent and the document is declined. Only the first sender label is used, so a quoted header lower on the sheet can never supply the sender. The full label set is in the footnote.1

And the matching. The sender value carries his name if it contains, case-insensitively, any of the sixteen surname forms tabulated above, or nmyhrvold, or nathanm as a whole word. On this population that tolerance is nearly idle. Only twenty-three distinct sender values occur across the 331, and all but one of them begin either with the clean string “Nathan Myhrvold” (the variation lying in the address that follows it, "Nathan Myhrvold <", "Nathan Myhrvold <[email protected]>", "Nathan Myhrvold •") or with the handle nmyhrvold. Requiring the untruncated string nathan myhrvold at the head of the value, after any opening quotation mark, returns 323; the eight it drops are the six nmyhrvold senders, one "Nathan Myhrvol" where the final d has fallen off the line, and one [email protected]. Those eight are the whole of the gap and they are named here so that a reader reaching 323 knows exactly which rule produced it.1

The result: 331 documents, 16% of the population. At a sixteen-line window, 1,451 of the 2,105 first sheets yield a sender value, 526 carry a sender label whose value is barred or blank, and 128 carry no sender label at all. Of the 1,451, 331 carry his name. Re-running the same rule at windows of 8, 12, 16, 24, 30 and 60 non-blank lines returns 331 every time. Ten documents were drawn at random from each of the three buckets and read, and each read as its label claims. act_rate.py is not cited anywhere on this page and was not run for any figure on it: it has been shown on this desk to err in both directions, understating one subject by 122 documents and overstating two others by 56 and 79.1

331 documents are not 331 messages. 315 of the 331 yield a parsable top-level date and time; those 315 carry 221 distinct timestamps, and 72 timestamps are shared by 166 documents between them, the release holding as many as eight copies of one message. Adding the 16 undatable documents at worst one-for-one, the 331 represent between 221 and 237 distinct messages. The sixteen fail to parse because the extraction eats characters out of the date: “Wednesday, Decem er”, “Sun 3/412012 3:05:14 AM”, “Saturday, March 11,111.11””.10

When. Over the 315 datable sender documents: 2009 one · 2010 eight · 2011 fifty-five · 2012 fifty-six · 2013 forty-six · 2014 sixty-nine · 2015 sixteen · 2016 thirteen · 2017 thirty-five · 2018 fifteen · 2019 one. There is no message from him in the sender set before 26 August 2009 or after 22 March 2019. The distribution is the finding: this is not a burst of correspondence around one event but a decade of it, and 2014, six years after the conviction, is its peak.10

The other half of the file could not be counted to the same standard, and this page says so rather than printing a number it cannot defend. A recipient rule of the same shape is not window-stable on this population, because recipient blocks here run to thirty names over six lines and because the extraction routinely runs body text onto the recipient line. Measured over the 2,105: an eight-line window gives 357, a sixteen-line window 385, a thirty-line window 399, and taking the whole first sheet 415. That spread is not a bound, it is an under-specified rule, and this page publishes only the rule it can close. The one recipient measurement that is closed is the nathanm census above, and it is the one that matters: those 157 sheets are exactly the documents an “addressed” count keyed to the full name would miss entirely.13

He is not a press subject, and the standard press test misfires here in a new way. Across all 2,105 documents, whole sheets and not merely first sheets, the news markers return: SECTION: 3, BYLINE: 3, LENGTH: n words 3, FINAL EDITION 1, Reprinted 0, Copyright YYYY 5. Their union is five documents, 0.24%, and all five are items about Epstein: the Vanity Fair profile of March 2003, a Palm Beach Post report of October 2007, a due-diligence dossier, a public-records production and a web page. Every one of the five carries the same Vanity Fair sentence about him and nothing else, a list of the businessmen who dined at Epstein’s house, naming him “former Microsoft executive Nathan Myhrvold”. Three of the five print that phrase with the magazine’s column break running through the word, “former Mi- crosoft executive Nathan Myhrvold”, and the clean string stands on three, one document printing it both ways. The pattern that fires heavily is All Rights Reserved, at 556 of the 2,105 first sheets, and on this subject it has two boilerplate sources, not one. 521 of those sheets carry Epstein’s own footer, copyright -all rights reserved, and 30 carry Myhrvold’s own company footer, “Message and attachments copyright © 2011, all rights reserved”, which prints in at least a dozen damaged renderings and in no two of them alike; fifteen sheets carry both, which accounts for 536; the remaining twenty were opened one by one and nineteen are those same two footers with the boilerplate broken by this production’s quoted-printable damage: copyr=ght, copyrig=t, copyript, copyright =all. Exactly one of the 556 is a publisher’s copyright line, the Vanity Fair clipping. A measurement reporting this population as 26% press-bearing would be measuring two men’s e-mail signatures.14

November 2002: the first dated contact

The earliest dated record of contact is a courier invoice, and it is seven years before the correspondence begins. A FedEx invoice of 11 November 2002, produced from Ghislaine Maxwell’s records, itemises a Priority Overnight Pak collected on 7 November 2002 from “JEFFREY E EPSTEIN / 457 MADISON AVE / NEW YORK NY 10022-6843”, recipient “NATHAN MYHRVOLD”, the recipient’s address blacked out, delivered on 8 November 2002 at 09:29 and signed for by “C.LEDSCHUCK”, the surname as the sheet prints it. Claudia Leschuck signed as “Sr. Assistant to Nathan Myhrvold” on his office’s traffic with Epstein’s from 2011 to 2015, and was still copied on his scheduling in October 2017. Nothing read for this page shows what was in the package, and nothing else in the file is dated between 2002 and 2009.7

August 2009: advice about a physicist, five weeks after the release

Epstein was released from the Palm Beach County jail to home detention on 22 July 2009, under a twelve-month term of community control, as set out at the 2008 non-prosecution agreement. The first message Myhrvold wrote in this file is dated thirty-five days later.15

On 26 August 2009 John Brockman circulated a request for advice about the Harvard physicist Lisa Randall, who was weighing offers from Caltech and NYU. At 17:34:52 +0000 Myhrvold answered at length, under the subject “RE: Lisa Randall”:

Feel free to pass this along to Lisa, and I would be happy to discuss with her in person in addition.

He worked through the choice, “I agree with your assessment about reputation value of Harvard/Caltch/NYU, but if she has a second book out and you as her agent I don’t think that she has to worry about that quite so much. Her brand value is mostly personal at this point - she isn’t just some random professor at Harvard, she is Lisa Randall”, considered whether putting her “in play” might backfire, and closed with a recommendation: “She should accept Caltech.” It runs to three sheets, and exactly one document among the 331 carries more extracted text than it: a forward of another man’s op-ed with a single line of his own above it.16

That sheet settles a question a live page on this wiki had to leave open. Elon Musk records that Brockman’s circular went to eleven people and says so carefully: the extraction of the sheet it cites gives ten names on the To: line and strands the eleventh, “Salar Kamangar;”, five lines below, so that page rests its figure on the salutation rather than stitching a line back together. Read at the image, the To: block of Myhrvold’s own reply prints all eleven consecutively in one block: “Pritzker, Nick”, “John Brockman”, “Elon Musk”, “W. Daniel Hillis”, “Jeffrey Epstein”, “Larry Page”, “Salar Kamangar”, “Charles Simonyi”, “Jeff Skoll”, “Pierre Omidyar”, “Sean Parker”, most of the addresses beside them barred. This is an independent confirmation at the image of a count that page could only make from a salutation, and it is not a conflict with it.16

Randall’s own message to the same group, that night, is where this subject’s sheet demonstrates the extraction’s worst habit. Her message of Wed 8/26/2009 10:23:05 PM prints a five-line To: block whose visible names are “Elon Musk”, [email protected], “Nathan Myhrvold” and “Charles Simonyi”, the last of them twice, among several recipient slots the producing party has blacked out. The text layer of that sheet returns “Elon Musk” and a mangled rendering of Epstein’s address and then runs straight on to the salutation: Myhrvold and both instances of Simonyi are deleted and the gap is closed. Read at the image at 400 dpi for this page, they are there. A closed list of recipients taken from this extraction is a completeness claim the extraction cannot support, which is why every list-shaped block cited on this page was rendered before it was described.17

2010–2011: the boat, the island, and the breakfast

By late 2010 they are corresponding directly, and Epstein is teasing. On 27 October 2010 he asked, “did you have putin on your boat??” On 5 November he wrote from Abu Dhabi about a nuclear-industry contact, “I told her what you were doing„ she is advising kazakstan”, and Myhrvold answered, in one word: “Cool!!”18

He was on the invitation list for a science weekend on the island and is not shown to have gone. On 22 September 2010 Al Seckel wrote to Cecile de Jongh, copying Epstein, to organise a three-day meeting on Little Saint James over 8–10 January 2011: guests at the Ritz, meetings on the island, Epstein paying travel, lodging and food for the principals. The list runs to twenty-odd scientists, and of one of them Seckel wrote: “only Nathan Mhyrvold is not definitely confirmed, but is trying hard to come, and he is a stellar guest, so we want to accommodate him in any way”. A second sheet in the same run notes he was “not sure about wife Rose Marie and two boys attending. Nathan has his own ‘et)”; the j of “jet” is missing from the text layer and is not supplied. Exactly one document in the union set carries a January 2011 date, and it falls three weeks after the weekend: Epstein’s reply of 30 January to a link Myhrvold had sent him the previous morning. Nothing read for this page shows whether he attended.19

Twice at the end of 2011, he told Epstein he was beside the island and heading over. At 10:02:18 PM on Wednesday 23 November 2011, under the subject “Happy Thanksgiving”:

Just motored past your island (I’m on my boat), so I thought I would wish you happy thanksgiving!

Epstein: “Come visit , I am here”. Myhrvold: “Headed to BVI now for diving, but maybe on Saturday…”. He wrote next, “So, I think that we can come by tomorrow afternoon. Any particular time that wouldn’t work?”, then, at 6:26:08 PM on the Saturday, “Should be there by 4p$m, and maybe a bit earlier” (the dollar sign is printed on the paper and is reproduced here, not mended), and again that night, “We should be there about 4pm, maybe a bit earlier.” The next morning Epstein wrote to the handle: “why don’t you come alone for breakfast so we can talk.. Rosemary knows it is safe”. Myhrvold’s answer, at 12:33:00 +0000, is four words: “Flying out early…”20

Four weeks later the same thing, more directly. At 13:55:05 +0000 on 21 December 2011: “Are you on the island? I am on the boat in the area, and might be able to stop by in the afternoon…” Epstein: “yes„ great anytime”. Myhrvold: “Will let you know soon”, then, at 19:40:20 +0000, “About 4:30”. Thirty-six seconds after that message, Epstein forwarded it to a member of his household staff, who is not identified here. At 20:27:45 +0000 Myhrvold wrote: “Heading there now”. The next morning Epstein replied, “I’m always there ,if yoU want to bOunce ideas”, and Myhrvold answered “Ok”.21

What that establishes and what it does not. It establishes that on two occasions in 2011 he was on his own vessel in the waters beside Little Saint James, that he asked to come over, that Epstein told him to and passed the time to his staff, and that he wrote “Heading there now”. It does not establish that he landed. No flight log, ferry record, guest list or arrival note naming him was located, and the messages stop at the intention. The house rule at Calendars and daily schedules applies with the same force to a boat as to a diary: a plan is a plan.

2012–2013: dinners, books, and a joke about prison

The traffic through these years is dense and mostly logistical: TED, Seattle, New York, the Caribbean. He hosted Epstein: “Come to my dinner paerty wednesday!” (24 February 2012), and “There is a New Jersey style greek diner one block from the Westin called the Long Beach Café. There will be fewer conference people there, so it is a good choice.” Epstein put questions to him about other people’s business and he answered them: asked to relay a message to Paul Allen about currency, “OK… What makes you think he has any?”; asked how many copies his cookbook had sold, a precise answer: “In English about 50,000 of the big book ( $625 ), over about 2 years.” Asked for a read on a named MIT scientist, he sent a page:

Hmm…please keep this confidential

He is very smart and personally quite impressive.

and then a short, sharp account of the MIT Media Lab and its culture, “It made bullshit acceptable, even desired, at MIT”, before declining to score the man himself: “Some of his stuff is great. Some is utter crap. He defends it all. I have never figured where it nets out.”2223242526

He also used Epstein’s list. On 4 July 2013 he circulated his own 33-page paper on bioterrorism, “I am known for sending around photos essays from my trips… But today I am sending around a far more serious topic”, and in December 2013 a dinosaur paper, “Everybody loved dinosaurs when they were little, but some of us never outgrew it”. The one document in the sender set that is not a personal message is his Bloomberg column distribution list, whose sender field reads “Nathan Myhrvold Bloomberg Column” and which carried his Bloomberg View pieces to subscribers; two of the 331 are of that kind and are disclosed here rather than counted as correspondence.2728

On 23 November 2013 the tone drops, and the exchange is the most striking thing in the file. Epstein had sent books and complained that ice cream had not survived the post. At 4:07 PM Myhrvold answered:

…pussy doesn’t FedEx well either! Some things you have to be there

Epstein, at 10:08 AM on his own clock: “not so fast kimo sabe.. its called fed sex. .” At 4:11 PM Myhrvold:

Hmmm… That sounds more like the sex you get in federal prison…but I guess you’d know more about that than me.

Epstein: “it is not i who is currently in prison”. At 15:15:20 +0000 Myhrvold closed it: “Well, I can’t disagree with that…” All five messages stand stacked on a single sheet, read at the image at 400 dpi, which is how their order is established; the two men’s stamps are on different clocks, neither carries a zone, and nothing here is converted. On the image a smiling-face emoji follows “than me.”; the extraction drops it. What this establishes is that in November 2013 Myhrvold knew Epstein had been imprisoned for a sex offence and joked with him about it. It establishes nothing else, and this page draws nothing else from it.29

A fortnight earlier Epstein had given him advice of a different kind. On 7 November 2013, to the handle:

that was fun, i am taking scarcity with me, to read. reminder moneys in private foundations are out of your marial asset esatee. as well as monies to the kids as well as biz losses. . You have the keys to your cell. / I know you know. .

The misspellings are the sheet’s. Myhrvold’s reply the same morning is four words: “Yes it was fun!” Four months later Epstein returned to it: “put your assets in a partnership so that its value is greatly discounted , in case of divource”. Myhrvold answered from Indonesia: “Just leaving indonesia, will call you in a few days”. Nothing read for this page shows that any of that advice was taken, and no document records a payment, a fee or an engagement between them in either direction.3031

2014: “you can consider me an older brother”

2014 is the busiest year in the file, and it is the year Epstein positions himself. On 2 February, after a meeting: “nice seeing you, feel free to bounce ideas off of me, strategy etc. . you can consider me an older brother. not smarter , but possibly more experienced with only your good in mind”. Myhrvold: “Thanks — it’s always fun to talk to you, and gives me a lot to think about…”32

Through the spring Epstein worked two introductions. He pressed a satellite-internet venture, “do you want to do this instead of google”, and Myhrvold answered as a patent holder: “Not at all clear that this is where I would spend $1 billion. However, we do have all of the patents from Teledesic. And we have by far the best antenna technology for them…” And he kept Bill Gates in the frame: “I had some time with bill today, lets talk”; “you can ask bill tomonv re the donor advised fund plan. its intersting”; “I will be in seatle on the 3rd, seeing bill at 330? you around?”. No document read for this page shows what came of any of it.3334

In June Epstein visited the Intellectual Ventures lab in Seattle, and he did not come alone. On 1 June Myhrvold wrote, “Have your people call mine, we will set up a lab visit, and you should come see my office. and bring”, the next word barred. Epstein answered, “i am going to leave her there,”. At 3:47 PM he wrote a single line whose one substantive word the producing party has blacked out: “i will only bring ▮ if you want”. Myhrvold’s reply, at 22:53:33 +0000 and read at the image:

Yes that would be great from my standpoint. Obviously if it is difficult for you or her then I understand.

Four days later, again read at the image: “Everything is great with me. It was great that you came out – thanks for bringing ▮ I think she had a great time yesterday hanging out at the lab tasting food.” The bar is the producing party’s and nothing is supplied for it here. The extraction of that second sheet deletes the bar and the word “I” beside it and closes the gap, returning the sentence as “thanks for bringing think she had a great time”; that is the third time on this page the same fault has been demonstrated at the image. Nothing read for this page identifies the person, states an age, or shows anything about her beyond that she went to a food lab.35

By August Epstein was counselling him through a separation. Myhrvold, 10 August: “I have news! Will call you tomorrow”. Epstein, that evening: “usually having ZERO contact is well advised normally they feel that if they can talk to you , they will get their way”. Myhrvold: “Ok sensei…you are skilled in ways that I am not…” The following day Epstein wrote twice more: practical advice about a rental, and then “feel free to call on me during this , what will be a unique period in your life. you are not disturbing me”. On 13 August, asked “how does it feel”, Myhrvold answered: “Great so fart Weird, but good…”, the sheet’s own typo.36

2015–2017: Ruemmler, Riyadh, Tokyo

In February 2015 Epstein used him to place a former White House Counsel. On 15 February: “kathy ruemmler . again is going to be in seatle. wed with nothing to do”. Myhrvold: “I would be happy to see her…” The next day, writing to Epstein and copying Kathryn Ruemmler directly: “I understand that you’re in Seattle this week, we can get together if you have time…” Three days later: “She said she is too busy”. In April he asked Epstein for her address himself, “Separately, can I have Kathy Ruemmler’s email - I promised to send her the bioterror memo”, and an office schedule for 21 April 2015 books a lunch with both of them at Epstein’s New York house, with “Claudia, Nathan’s assistant” noted beside it; the text layer of that sheet gives the entry as “LUNCH w/Kath Ruemmler and Nathan M hrvold”, and it is not repaired here.37

He wrote to Epstein about business he wanted help with. On 25 April 2017, under the subject “Saudi Guy”:

A deal has been proposed between my company and a Saudi guy named HRH Prince Hussam bin Saud

Apparently the aforementioned guy says he can help with a deal that is complicated, but involved buying patents for them and other things (apparently Saudi Aramco pays a lot of patent licenses to US oil companies and would like some help…). HRH wants 35% which I am told is customary and all above board. Since you have a friend there I was wondering.

Epstein came back the next morning, “my guy likes him. he asked me the name of your co. .? i told him id get back to him.”, and Myhrvold answered: “Intellectual Ventures… nothing odd about that…” Nothing read for this page shows that any such deal was made. The traffic runs the other way too: Epstein offered him to third parties as a reference and an introduction: to a journalist, “nathan myrhvold. suggested you use him as a refrence for masa”; to a satellite entrepreneur, “nathan mhyrvold . long time buddy. said you guys might end up using his antenna co.”; and in March 2017, asked whether he and Masayoshi Son were “still buddies”, Myhrvold replied “Sort of…I have not talked to him in a couple years”. By September he was in Tokyo with that entrepreneur to see Son.3839

The rest of these years is companionable and slight. Asked in June 2015 whether he was all right after a rough patch, in a long and oddly tender message from Epstein about reputation and emotion, Myhrvold answered: “On balance I have decided to wait on invading Russia :-)” In February 2016 he was in Paris, and Epstein wrote to a correspondent there describing him as “bill gates right hand , and food guru”; a month later Epstein reported “rothschild thrilled with gift/”, and Myhrvold answered, “Great, we aim to please!”406

On Saturday 7 October 2017 Epstein saw him at two in the afternoon in New York, an hour after lunching with the President of the United Nations General Assembly. The office schedule for that day reads “1:00pm LUNCH w/Miroslav Lajcak … 2:00pm Appt w/Nathon Myhrvold”, and the negotiation that produced it, Epstein’s staff asking Myhrvold’s assistant to move him around the Lajčák lunch, is set out at Miroslav Lajčák. Epstein’s own note the next day: “your thoughts were very helpful yesterday thx”.41

October 2017: two exchanges, and what the extraction does to one of them

The first is a four-message thread, and a single sheet of it will mislead anyone who reads only that sheet. At 18:10 on Saturday 7 October 2017 Epstein wrote to Myhrvold, subject blank, four words: “thin tall short . dark hair?” At 7:41 PM Myhrvold replied with one word: “Smart”. At 00:05:08 +0000 the next morning Epstein answered: “That’s contents, I was asking packaging”. Twelve hours later: “your thoughts were very helpful yesterday thx”. Nothing read for this page shows who or what the exchange concerned, and this page supplies nothing for it.

The attribution is the point. One copy of this thread, EFTA02587685, prints Myhrvold’s reply and Epstein’s quoted question with no header line between them: the sheet reads “Smart”, then a gap, then “thin tall short . dark hair?”, so that the whole body appears to be his. Read at the image, that sheet carries no From: line for the quoted message at all. Two twins, EFTA00995991 and EFTA00996153, print the header, “From: Jeffrey E. / Sent: Saturday, October 7, 2017 18:10 / To: Nathan Myhrvold”, and settle it. A page built on the first sheet alone would have put Epstein’s sentence in Myhrvold’s mouth.42

The second exchange stands on its own facts. On Monday 9 October at 17:23 Epstein sent him an image, Screen_Shot_2017-10-09_at_11.22.18_PM.png; on the sheet the picture itself does not reproduce and an empty frame stands where it was. At 12:28 AM Myhrvold answered: “Very pretty!” At 18:30 on 10 October Epstein wrote back: “your call.” followed by a word the producing party has blacked out on the sheet cited here. At 22:33:35 +0000 Myhrvold replied: “I am leaving tomorrow am…maybe next time”. Nothing read for this page shows what the image was of.43

2018–2019: the last messages

The last stretch is illness and small talk. In July 2018: “I came down with shingles, which is horrible. The worst pain I have ever felt. It’s been 3 weeks and the doctor says it could be 8 to 12 weeks total.” Epstein: “wow. sorrry, I guess i should get the vaccine”. Myhrvold: “YES!!!!!”. Epstein: “is it like be married?” Myhrvold: “MUCH WORSE”. At the end of August, recovered: “Yes, finally! My god that was miserable - for 7 weeks! Still hurts a little. Sunday I go to Italy for 3 weeks researching my next book - pizza!” In October, from the handle-truncated sender nmyhrvold, on the Virgin Islands after Hurricane Irma: “Maybe but not clear yet Have you rebuilt/refurbished after the storm ???”444546

The last message he wrote in this file is dated 22 March 2019, four months before Epstein’s arrest, subject “New York!”:

I will be in NYC March 31 thru April 1, and wo=ld love to get together if that is where you are… Nathan

The = is this production’s quoted-printable damage standing in the middle of the word “would”; it is printed as the sheet gives it and not mended. No reply to it was located, and nothing read for this page records whether the meeting happened.47

The Dershowitz filings

The only document in this file that alleges anything about Myhrvold alleges it in order to discount it. In Giuffre v. Dershowitz, filed in the Southern District of New York on 16 April 2019, Virginia Giuffre pleaded that Alan Dershowitz had defamed her by denying her account. The Amended Complaint, at paragraph 79, reads:

In May 2015, Defendant requested confidential settlement negotiations with Plaintiff’s lawyers in which Defendant sought to convince Plaintiff’s lawyers that Plaintiff was mistaken, and that the person to whom Epstein had lent Plaintiff was Nathan Myhrvold, not Defendant.

Paragraph 81(c), listing the ways the pleading says that account collapsed:

Defendant’s claim that Plaintiff confused him with Nathan Myhrvold was tested by showing Plaintiff pictures of both. She confirmed that it was Defendant, not Myhrvold, with whom she had sex.

Both passages were read at the image at 400 dpi. What the filing records about Myhrvold is that his name was put forward by another man and rejected by the woman making the allegation. It contains no allegation against him, and no document read for this page contains one. The suit itself was dismissed with prejudice by agreement on 9 November 2022, after Giuffre said she might have been mistaken in identifying Dershowitz; that history, and Dershowitz’s denials, are set out at Alan Dershowitz and Virginia Giuffre and are not re-derived here.4849

Two further court records name him in passing and allege nothing. A declaration of Dershowitz’s in Giuffre v. Maxwell says the evidence against him “is equally applicable to dozens of other academics and public figures who were associated with Mr. Epstein” and names Myhrvold in the list that follows.50 And in the Virgin Islands’ 2023 action against JPMorgan Chase a deponent, run through a list of names, was asked “Nathan Myhrvold with Microsoft?” and answered: “Yeah, I know Nathan… I don’t know whether Epstein introduced Nathan or not.”8

What this page does not establish

  • No money. No document read for this page records a payment, an investment, a fee, a grant or a donation between Epstein and Myhrvold, or to Intellectual Ventures, in either direction. Searches of the full-text index for "Intellectual Ventures" joined to "invoice", for "Myhrvold" joined to "wire", and of every document in the union set carrying a currency figure, returned no sum passing between the two men: what they return is the cookbook prices he quotes in his own message of 19 April 2013, the courier charges on the 2002 invoice, and two sums he names in his own prose about other people’s business, “Not at all clear that this is where I would spend $1 billion” of the satellite venture and “HRH wants 35%” of the Saudi proposal, both quoted above; no ledger, statement, agreement or transfer naming him was located.
  • No island landing. He twice said he was beside Little Saint James and heading over, and Epstein twice told his staff to expect him. Neither arrival is recorded in anything read for this page, and no flight log, manifest, ferry booking or guest list naming him was located.
  • No January 2011 weekend. He was on Al Seckel’s invitation list as “not definitely confirmed”. The only document in the union set dated in January 2011 is an exchange of the 29th and 30th about a newspaper link, and nothing read for this page shows whether he went.
  • No knowledge. Nothing read for this page shows what he knew about Epstein’s conduct, beyond what his own words show: that by November 2013 he knew Epstein had been in prison for a sex offence and made a joke of it, and that in 2015 he told Epstein “I am there anytime you want to vent” was a kindness he was glad of.
  • No public statement. No press item, interview or statement by Myhrvold about Epstein appears anywhere in this release. The news-marker tally above is five documents out of 2,105, and all five are about Epstein.

No link below asserts a relationship beyond what the cited sheet shows.

  • Pages this one extends: Lisa Randall, whose August 2009 message he was a deleted recipient of; Elon Musk, whose count of eleven recipients on the Brockman circular is confirmed here at the image from a different sheet; Miroslav Lajčák, whose October 2017 lunch shares its day with Myhrvold’s appointment.
  • People named on sheets cited here: Jeffrey Epstein (the correspondent throughout); Lesley Groff (booked the meetings); John Brockman (wrote the 2009 circular); Al Seckel and Cecile de Jongh (organised the January 2011 island weekend); Kathryn Ruemmler (the 2015 Seattle and New York meetings); Barnaby Marsh (copied on the February 2013 introduction); Bill Gates and Boris Nikolic (named in the TED dinner traffic); Leon Black (named in the 2013 exchange about cookbook publishing); Tom Pritzker (told in March 2011 that Myhrvold and Gates would be at dinner); Alan Dershowitz and Virginia Giuffre (the 2019 filings).
  • Places: Little Saint James.
  • Topics: Calendars and daily schedules, whose own text notes that appointment records establish only that meetings were scheduled, which is why the 2011 island approaches are described here as approaches and not as visits.

Sources

Thirteen of the documents cited below were rendered locally from the released PDF and read at the image; each of those footnotes says so and gives the resolution. The remainder are cited from the text layer and are marked UNVERIFIED, and no claim about what stands on an unrendered sheet (a bar, a field state, a name’s position, a typographic mark) is made anywhere on this page from the text layer alone. Where a name, address or telephone line is blacked out by the producing party, nothing is supplied in its place. A personal contact value is printed on this page only in two cases: where it belongs to one of the two principals, Epstein or Myhrvold, whose own addresses are the subject of the identification argument above; or where the producing party left it unbarred on a sheet rendered for this page and its holder is a named public figure. Six such values are printed and no others. The identity of private individuals of no investigative bearing is outside this page’s scope, and every elision marked … inside a quoted office schedule stands where the sheet prints a telephone number.

Clocks. No page-wide zone is assumed. A time carrying an explicit offset is printed with that offset wherever an order or an interval is asserted from it. A time taken from an Outlook Sent: stamp or from a quoting client’s attribution line, neither of which carries a zone in this production, is given as the sheet prints it and is never converted. Every sequence asserted on this page rests either on two explicitly zoned stamps, or on one message standing quoted beneath another on the same sheet.

Footnotes

  1. The full sender-label set used by the rule, anchored at line start, case-insensitive, each optionally followed by [:;.]: From, Fromm, Fran, Front, Frorn, Prom, Fram, Frcm, Flom, Fmm, Frem, Frorm, Frnm, F rom, F-om, Fro m, Frm, Fron, Fr om. The bar on the next line, applied when the label’s own line is empty: the next non-blank line is rejected as a value if it begins with any of those forms or with To, TO, T o, Tc, Cc, CC, Bcc, Sent, Date, Subject, Subj, Importance, Attachments or Re, with or without a following [:;.] — a line opening Subject Alert … is rejected exactly as Subject: is. That last clause is load-bearing: read as requiring the punctuation, the rule returns 332, the extra document being one whose sender label is empty and whose next line is a subject line naming him. The name pattern applied to the sender value, case-insensitive, as a substring: myhrvold, myrhvold, mhyrvold, mryvold, myhvrold, yhrvold, myhryold, myhrvol, myhvold, myrvold, mvhrvold, myhtvold, mybrvold, myhrvodl, myhrvoid, mhyrvoid, nmyhrvold; or nathanm as a whole word. Counters at a sixteen-non-blank-line window over the 2,105 first sheets: sender value present 1,451, sender label present but value barred or blank 526, no sender label 128 (1,451 + 526 + 128 = 2,105); his name in the sender value 331. At windows of 8, 12, 16, 24, 30 and 60 non-blank lines the figure is 331, 331, 331, 331, 331, 331. The twenty-three distinct sender values, with their counts: Nathan Myhrvold 241 · Nathan Myhrvold < 40 · "Nathan Myhrvold" 12 · "Nathan Myhrvold" < 7 · Nathan Myhrvold • 5 · "Nathan Myhrvold" •,= 3 · nmyhrvold 3 · Nathan Myhrvold <[email protected]> 3 · nmyhrvold • 2 · Nathan Myhrvold sc 2 · and thirteen occurring once each, among them Nathan Myhrvold Bloomberg Column, Nathan Myhrvold Bloomberg Column <, Nathan Myhrvol, [email protected], nmyhrvold < and Nathan Myhrvold <[email protected]>. Bucket membership was tested, not inferred from the total reconciling: ten documents were drawn at random from each of the three buckets and read, and each read as its label claims. act_rate.py was not run for any figure on this page. UNVERIFIED: this is a measurement over extractions and no sheet was rendered for it. ↩ ↩2 ↩3 ↩4 ↩5

  2. Name-form probe, 2026-09-13, each form an FTS5 phrase match differenced against the 2,105-document base set. Gains as tabulated in the body. Nulls, each returning 0 documents: "yMhrvold", "Myhrovld", "Myhrvlod", "Mryhvold", "Myrhvoid", "Natahn Myhrvold", "Nathna Myhrvold", "Ntahan Myhrvold", "Anthan Myhrvold", "Nahtan Myhrvold", "Nathen Myhrvold", "Nathan Myhrvolt", "Myhrvoid Nathan", "Myrhvold Nathan", "Mhyrvold Nathan", "Nathan M Myhrvold", "Nathan Paul Myhrvold", "Myhrvold Nathan P". Forms subsumed by the surname token and therefore not counted separately in the union: "Myhrvold Nathan" (200 documents, 68 outside), "Nathan P Myhrvold" (7, 7 outside), "N Myhrvold" (6, 1 outside) — every document reached by these also carries the token myhrvold and is inside the 119. scripts/ocr_variants.py was run on both "Nathan Myhrvold" (3 forms from measured glyph pairs, none of which gained a document) and, with --wide, on "Myhrvold" (26 forms); it generates none of the four transpositions and none of the seventeen forms that gained documents. ↩ ↩2 ↩3 ↩4

  3. nathanm census, 2026-09-13. "nathanm" returns 170 documents, 159 outside the base set; all 159 were opened. 157 carry the handle as the value of a top-level To: or Cc: field under the recipient rule described in the body; the other two are EFTA00506839 p.18 and EFTA01064088 pp.7–8, forensic extracts of a Mac address book in which nathanm is a stored first-name field. Top-level sender over the 159: 151 Jeffrey Epstein (152 counting one sheet whose sender value the extraction renders “[dicey E.”), 4 Lesley Groff, one barred or blank, and the two address-book extracts. Year distribution: 2010 five, 2011 twenty-nine, 2012 thirty-nine, 2013 thirty-two, 2014 forty-nine, 2018 two, three undatable. The image evidence is EFTA00975921 p.1, read at the image at 400 dpi, whose header prints From: Jeffrey Epstein <[email protected]> and, beneath it, To: nathanm < followed by a solid black bar over the address. The corroborating sheets, cited from the text layer: EFTA00964985 p.1 and EFTA01963421 p.1, both To: nathanm and both carrying “trayvon myhrvold” in the body; EFTA00954694 p.1, To: nathanm, Cc: Bamaby Marsh, body opening “nathan ,”; EFTA00966180 p.1, “thanks for letting me attend kirkland kinder garden.”; EFTA00687860 p.1 and EFTA00932222 p.1, both about Paul Allen. The six one-line messages quoted in the body are, each To: nathanm, each a single sheet and each with one further copy in the same set: EFTA00898756 p.1 “come visit”, Sat, 27 Nov 2010 14:54:53 +0000; EFTA00947319 p.1 “progress?”, Mon, 12 Nov 2012 19:36:48 +0000; EFTA00948323 p.1 “time passes quickly”, Sat, 24 Nov 2012 18:44:49 +0000; EFTA00978192 p.1 “when do i get to see you again?”, Sun, 08 Dec 2013 01:51:39 +0000; EFTA00988626 p.1 “how we doing:?”, Mon, 28 Apr 2014 12:14:44 +0000; EFTA00869159 p.1 “still kicking?”, Mon, 29 Sep 2014 11:22:23 +0000. Those six are UNVERIFIED, from the text layer. The full name is not used to reach any of these and could not be: on 157 of the 159 it does not print. ↩ ↩2

  4. Signature block “Nathan Myhrvold / Founder, CEO” over www.intellectualventures.com, printed on EFTA02583956 p.1 (Sent: Sunday, May 11, 2014 3:44 PM) and EFTA02585269 p.1. UNVERIFIED, from the text layer. ↩

  5. Vanity Fair, March 2003, “The Talented Mr. Epstein”, as held in Epstein’s files at EFTA00204650 p.3. UNVERIFIED, from the text layer. The clipping is cited only for the words it prints about him and this page adopts none of its account of anything else. ↩

  6. E-mail, Jeffrey Epstein to a correspondent in Paris, Sat, 20 Feb 2016 20:24:01 +0000: “bill gates right hand , and food guru Nathan Myrhvold is in paris until tues if you are here. he had the best selling food book in history last year.” EFTA00833876 p.1, with copies at EFTA00650635 p.1 and EFTA01186201 p.1. The word “guru” is repaired from a cited twin and the repair is named here: the extraction of EFTA00833876 and of EFTA00650635 gives “food gum”, and EFTA01186201 p.1 gives “food guru”. Nothing else in the sentence is altered. Myhrvold’s own messages of 18 and 21 February 2016 about the Paris trip are at EFTA00640267 p.1, EFTA00834114 p.1 and EFTA00685981 p.1; the gift exchange of 19 March 2016 at EFTA00685320 p.1. UNVERIFIED, from the text layer. ↩ ↩2

  7. FedEx invoice number 4-447-40902, invoice date “Nov 11, 2002”, page 8 of 11. EFTA02825472 p.24 of the production run, read at the image at 600 dpi. The entry reads: “Picked up: Nov 07, 2002 / Payor: Shipper / Service Type FedEx Priority Overnight / Package Type FedEx Pak / Weight 1.0 lbs, 0.5 kgs / Delivered Nov 08, 2002 09 29 / Signed by C.LEDSCHUCK”, sender “JEFFREY E EPSTEIN / 457 MADISON AVE / NEW YORK NY 10022-6843 US”, recipient “NATHAN MYHRVOLD”, with the recipient’s address under two solid black bars beneath that name and one further bar standing above the sender’s printed name and address. The signature name is reproduced exactly as the image prints it. The account number in the invoice header is not reproduced. Claudia Leschuck is identified from her own signature block, “Claudia Leschuck / Sr. Assistant to Nathan Myhrvold / INTELLECTUAL VENTURES”, at EFTA01960782 p.1; the block occurs on 132 documents in the base set, the earliest carrying a top-level date of Mon 5/23/2011 7:16:29 PM (EFTA02030667 p.1) and the latest Wednesday, October 14, 2015 9:14 PM (EFTA02484314 p.1). She is still copied on his scheduling in October 2017, at EFTA02225735 p.1. She also writes, on Tue 12/27/2011 5:07:05 PM, “Best address for Nathan is: Nathan Myhrvold Intellectual Ventures”, at EFTA02177184 p.1. All of those are UNVERIFIED, from the text layer. The invoice does not say what was in the package and this page does not guess. ↩ ↩2

  8. Deposition transcript exhibit, Government of the United States Virgin Islands v. JPMorgan Chase Bank, No. 1:22-cv-10904-JSR (S.D.N.Y.), Document 238-21, filed 25 July 2023. EFTA02810739 p.12, read at the image at 400 dpi for this pass — the sheet carries the protective-order header and the reporter’s running footer that this transcript prints on every page, is numbered transcript page 88, and runs the witness through a numbered list of names, “Kathryn Ruemmler? … Bill Gates? … David Gergen? … Boris Nikolic? … Larry Summers? … Nathan Myhrvold with Microsoft?”. The answer stands on lines 15 to 17 in three parts, and this page quotes the first and the third: “Yeah, I know Nathan. I don’t / know — same answer. I don’t know whether / Epstein introduced Nathan or not.” The extraction of this sheet reorders those lines and interleaves the answer to the previous question, which is why it was rendered rather than quoted from the text layer. A list carrying his name in the same litigation is at EFTA02811664 p.8, UNVERIFIED. The deponent is not named on this page, and the transcript is cited only for the words quoted. ↩ ↩2

  9. Corpus counts measured 2026-09-13 against /mnt/d/dump/AI-investigator/Epstein-research-data/full_text_corpus.db, over pages_fts joined to pages, counting distinct efta_number values and never pages. "Nathan Myhrvold" 2,105 documents (2,505 pages); "Myhrvold" 2,224 (2,657 pages); "Nathan" 7,733 (13,279 pages), of which 5,628 lie outside the 2,105. Union of the seventeen forms tabulated in the body: 2,600. All figures are FTS5 phrase matches; the index folds case and strips punctuation, so forms differing only in case or in a non-alphanumeric character cannot be distinguished by it and are not claimed as separate tests. ↩ ↩2

  10. Duplicate and date analysis over the 331, 2026-09-13, from the first Date: or Sent: value in the top-level header of each first sheet. 315 yield a parsable date and time; those carry 221 distinct timestamps; 72 timestamps are shared by 166 documents between them, the largest group being eight copies of one message of 15 July 2011. Adding the 16 undatable documents at worst one-for-one gives 221 to 237 distinct messages. Year tally over the 315: 2009 1, 2010 8, 2011 55, 2012 56, 2013 46, 2014 69, 2015 16, 2016 13, 2017 35, 2018 15, 2019 1. The sixteen unparsable values, printed as the extraction gives them, include “Friday, May 23. 2014 12:02:54 AM”, “Thursday, February IIIIIIIIIIm”, “Sun 3/412012 3:05:14 AM”, “Mon 718/2013 2:42:50 PM”, “Wednesday, Decem er”, “Saturday, March 11,111.11”” and “Saturday, September 8,2018 1:05 PM”. UNVERIFIED, from the text layer. ↩ ↩2 ↩3

  11. Residue census, 2026-09-13. The union of the seventeen forms adds 495 documents to the 2,105-document base set. All 495 were opened and the matched passage of every one was read; this is not a sample. 494 are this subject. The one that is not is EFTA01802105 p.1, a Technology Review item bylined “Conor Myhrvold / Conor L. Myhrvold”, reached by the surname token alone; "Conor Myhrvold" returns that document and no other, and "Cameron Myhrvold" returns none. The residue divides, taking the forms in this order and assigning each document to the first that reaches it: nathanm 159 (157 in which it is a top-level recipient value, 2 forensic Mac address-book extracts carrying it as a stored contact field); the correct surname alone 117 — office traffic addressed to “Intellectual Ventures Myhrvold Nathan”, a display name his office’s address book supplies and which 91 documents carry, among them EFTA00318862 p.1, Lesley Groff writing to it on Thu, 15 Sep 2016 17:37:54 +0000; plus index rows, schedules, press clippings and court filings; then Myrhvold 78, Mhyrvold 71, Mryvold 28, and 42 across the remaining twelve damaged forms. 159 + 117 + 78 + 71 + 28 + 42 = 495. The order matters and is stated because the forms overlap: taken in another order the middle buckets move by a few documents while the total does not. UNVERIFIED: this is a census of extractions, and no field-state claim is made from it. ↩ ↩2

  12. The transposition quotations, all cited from the text layer and UNVERIFIED unless a rendering is stated: “nathan mhyrvold . long time buddy. said you guys might end up using his antenna co.” at EFTA01048629 p.1, Date: Thu, 20 Apr 2017 10:35:38 +0000, with four further copies; “tell him to ask nathan mhyrvold.. or bin salman” at EFTA02656981 p.1, Sent: Thursday, March 9, 2017 3:23 PM; “For breakfast with Nathan Mhyrvold on Monday are you good with bagels, smoked salmon, cream cheese, dill and tomato platter type thing and mixed berries?” at EFTA00556090 p.1, Date: Fri, 05 Oct 2012 19:23:47 +0000; “LM for Nathan Mhyrvold…Claudia hopes he can call you back shortly” at EFTA00431877 p.1, 28 Jun 2011 18:05:01 +0000; “nathan myrhvold will be with me on fri„ want to join.. or we can talk sat afternoon. on the phone” at EFTA00907257 p.1, Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2011 11:23:43 +0000, Epstein to Barnaby Marsh; “Jeffrey is meeting with Nathan Myrhvold soon and that always puts him in a good mood” at EFTA00386593 p.1, dated 29 July 2013. The Mryvold set: all 28 documents are copies of one numbered list in Epstein’s files, “4. nathan mryvold, hillis, lloyd, jes staley, jamie dimon. henry jarecki,”, among them EFTA00738491 p.1 and EFTA01818665 p.1; the same list is quoted at Lisa Randall, where it is rendered at 400 dpi and reported to carry no redaction. ↩

  13. Recipient measurement, 2026-09-13, reported because it failed and the failure is the finding. The rule tried: on the document’s own first sheet, take every line whose start matches To, TO, T o, Tc, Cc, CC, Bcc, BCC, Ce or Cr followed by [:;.], together with its continuation lines up to the next header label, and stop reading at the second sender label, a quoted header in this production always reopening with one; the document is addressed to him if any such value matches the name pattern above. At windows of 8, 12, 16, 24 and 30 non-blank lines the figure is 357, 369, 385, 396 and 399, and with the window removed altogether it is 415. The hinges are named and neither can be closed by widening: recipient blocks in this population run to thirty names over six or more lines, so any window truncates some of them, while removing the window lets the extraction’s habit of running body text onto the recipient line pull matches out of message bodies. 118 rows of the windowless result were inspected individually — every row whose matched value exceeded 200 characters, plus every row on a sheet with no sender label — and both classes were found in it. This page therefore publishes no single addressed figure. A header-block variant that terminates on two consecutive non-label lines was also built and is stable at 439, but it is rejected here because the same construction, applied to the sender field, loses thirteen documents whose To: value wraps over two lines and gains three from quoted headers — that is, it is stable and wrong, which is the more useful thing to record. ↩

  14. Press-marker tally over all 2,105 documents, whole sheets, 2026-09-13, coverage stated for every pattern: SECTION: 3; BYLINE: 3; LENGTH:\s*\d+\s*words 3; FINAL EDITION 1; Reprinted 0; Copyright\s+(19|20)\d\d 5; TRANSCRIPT 5; UNITED STATES DISTRICT 6; CASE NO 1. The union of the six news markers is five documents: EFTA00204650 p.3 (the Vanity Fair profile of March 2003, “The Talented Mr. Epstein”), EFTA00188312 p.109 and p.139 (a Palm Beach Post page of 18 October 2007 bound into a larger production), EFTA01405372 p.12 (a due-diligence dossier), DOJ-OGR-00032040 p.13 and p.32 (a public-records production) and EFTA01661603 p.35 (an archived web page). All five carry the same Vanity Fair sentence and no other mention of him; on the three whose extraction breaks the magazine’s column the phrase reads “former Mi- crosoft executive Nathan Myhrvold”, save on DOJ-OGR-00032040 p.13, which reads “former Mr- crosoft”; the clean string “former Microsoft executive Nathan Myhrvold” is found on EFTA00204650 p.3, EFTA00188312 p.109 and EFTA01405372 p.12. Two of the five carry the clipping twice, so the phrase occurs on seven pages across the five documents. UNVERIFIED, from the text layer. The twelve documents carrying TRANSCRIPT, UNITED STATES DISTRICT or CASE NO are court filings and depositions, four of them the Giuffre papers described in the body. Footer tally over the first sheets of the 2,105: [Aa]ll [Rr]ights [Rr]eserved 556; copyright\s*-\s*all rights reserved 521; MESSAGE AND ATTACHMENTS COPYRIGHT, case-insensitive, 43. The company footer has no single printed form: across the base set the extraction gives at least twelve renderings, among them Message and attachments copyright © 2010, all rights reserved (18 first sheets), MESSAGE AND ATTACHMENTS COPYRIGHT © 2011, ALL =IGHTS RESERVED. (8), MESSAGE AND ATTACHMENTS COPYRIGHT ®,ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. (4) and MESSAGE AND ATTACHMENTS COPYRIGHT 1::0 2010, AU. RIGHTS RESEVED. (1). The form quoted in the body is at EFTA01776943 p.1; an all-capital rendering with an intact “ALL RIGHTS RESERVED” and an intact ”© 2011” appears on no sheet in the corpus, and is not quoted here. The three do not partition the 556 and the page does not pretend they do: 30 of the 43 fall inside it, 15 of those 30 carry Epstein’s footer as well, and the other 13 fall outside because on them the boilerplate prints in capitals or is damaged (ALL =IGHTS RESERVED, ®,ALL RIGHTS RESERVED), which the case-sensitive marker cannot reach. 521 ∪ 30 = 536, and 536 + 20 = 556. All twenty sheets in the first set and neither of the others were opened: nineteen are the same two footers with “copyright” broken by quoted-printable damage (copyr=ght, copyrig=t, copyript), and the twentieth is the Vanity Fair clipping’s “Copyright 2003 The Conde Nast Publications Inc. All Rights Reserved”, on the first sheet of EFTA00204650, which is why it is in a tally of first sheets; the same line stands deeper inside EFTA00188312, whose own first sheet is not a clipping. Copyright and All Rights Reserved are not press markers in this corpus, and on this subject they are two men’s signature blocks rather than one. ↩

  15. Dates of Epstein’s 2008 plea, sentence and release are taken from the 2008 non-prosecution agreement, which sources them to the Justice Department Office of Professional Responsibility report: guilty plea and sentence 30 June 2008, “released to home detention on July 22, 2009”, the sentence being twelve and six months’ incarceration “followed by twelve months of community control”. Nothing on this page re-derives them. ↩

  16. E-mail, Nathan Myhrvold to eleven recipients, Subject “RE: Lisa Randall”, Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2009 17:34:52 +0000. EFTA00769424 p.1, read at the image at 400 dpi; the run is 3 printed sheets, his own message occupying the first two and Brockman’s quoted circular the third, and the quotation “She should accept Caltech.” stands at the foot of p.1. On the image the To: block runs to six printed lines and prints eleven names consecutively — “Pritzker, Nick”, “John Brockman”, “Elon Musk”, “W. Daniel Hillis” (whose address [email protected] prints in the clear), “Jeffrey Epstein”, “Larry Page”, “Salar Kamangar”, “Charles Simonyi”, “Jeff Skoll”, “Pierre Omidyar” (address [email protected] in the clear) and “Sean Parker” — with the other addresses under solid black bars, and the From: line printing “Nathan Myhrvold” with its address barred. No name is stranded on a later line and nothing is stitched. The sheet at Elon Musk on which that page rests its count of eleven is a different document, EFTA00769427, and that page’s own account of its damage is not disputed here. ↩ ↩2

  17. E-mail, Lisa Randall to a group, Subject “Advising”, Sent: Wed 8/26/2009 10:23:05 PM. EFTA02435936 p.1, read at the image at 400 dpi for this page. The To: block runs to five printed lines; the recipient names it prints are “Elon Musk”, [email protected][[email protected]], “Nathan Myhrvold” and “Charles Simonyi”, the last of these twice, with the addresses beside them and several further recipient slots under solid black bars. The text layer of this sheet returns only "To: \nElon Musk \[email protected] \nmail.com \nHello to everyone \nFrom: \nLisa Randall" — Myhrvold and both instances of Simonyi are absent from it and no mark of any kind stands where they were. The same sheet is rendered and described independently at Lisa Randall; this page re-rendered it rather than inheriting that description, and the two readings agree. ↩

  18. E-mails, Nathan Myhrvold to Jeffrey Epstein: Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2010 16:26:55 +0000, EFTA00753508 p.1, quoting beneath it Epstein’s “did you have putin on your boat??” of Wed Oct 27 09:23:47 2010; and Date: Fri, 05 Nov 2010 19:30:01 +0000, EFTA00752538 p.1, “Cool!!”, quoting Epstein’s message about “Lady barbara judge„ chairman of the uk atomic energy commission”. Each has one further copy. UNVERIFIED, from the text layer. ↩

  19. E-mail, Al Seckel forwarding his own message of Wed, September 22, 2010 12:02:06 PM to Cecile de Jongh and “Jeff Epstein”, Subject “Fw: Little Saint James - Weekend of the Ath of January”, Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2010 16:51:46 +0000. EFTA00753256 pp.1–2. The forwarded message sets the dates as “Saturday, Sunday, and Monday, which are the 8th, 9th, and 10th respectively, and with guests arriving on the 7th and leaving on the 11th”, states that guests will stay at the Ritz and meet on the island, and that “Jeff will pay for the travel, lodging, and food for the primary guests”. The parenthetical about wife and children is on p.2. Copies at EFTA02418637 pp.1–2, EFTA01980921 p.1 and EFTA02417540 p.1. UNVERIFIED, from the text layer. The absence claim about January 2011 was re-tested for this pass by scanning the top-level header date of every first sheet in the 2,600-document union set, over every damaged form of the Date/Sent label with and without following punctuation. Exactly one document in the union carries a January 2011 date: EFTA01834166 p.1, Sent Sun 1/30/2011 1:33:28 AM, Epstein to Myhrvold, Subject “Re: right up your alley…”, the body reading “how do the jews fit in?” — Epstein’s own remark, standing above Myhrvold’s message of “On Sat, Jan 29, 2011 at 11:49 AM” whose whole content is a link to a satirical news item about the gap between rich and poor. It is three weeks after the 8–10 January weekend, says nothing about it, and this page draws nothing from it beyond the date. The earlier form of this test required a colon after the label and therefore could not see this sheet, whose label prints as Sent with no punctuation; the claim it supported has been corrected rather than restated. UNVERIFIED, from the text layer. ↩

  20. E-mails of 23–27 November 2011, Subject “Happy Thanksgiving” and “Re:”. His of Wed 11/23/2011 10:02:18 PM at EFTA02003601 p.1; of Wed 11/23/2011 10:35:42 PM at EFTA02002019 p.1; of Sat 11/26/2011 2:37:49 AM at EFTA01996537 p.1 — the sheet quoting that message, EFTA01992375, attributes it instead to Fri, Nov 25, 2011 at 10:37 PM, four hours earlier and on the previous day; neither stamp carries a zone, nothing is converted, and no day is asserted for it here; of Sat 11/26/2011 6:26:08 PM at EFTA01992375 p.1, read at the image at 400 dpi, on which the body prints “Should be there by 4p$m, and maybe a bit earlier” — the $ is ink on the paper and is not an extraction fault — and beneath which the whole chain back to 23 November stands quoted; of Sat 11/26/2011 10:02:51 PM at EFTA01993525 p.1; and of Sun, 27 Nov 2011 12:33:00 +0000, “Flying out early…”, at EFTA00925133 p.1 with three further copies. Epstein’s “why don’t you come alone for breakfast so we can talk.. Rosemary knows it is safe” of Sun 11/27/2011 10:44:13 AM is at EFTA01848158 p.1, addressed To: nathanm. All but EFTA01992375 UNVERIFIED, from the text layer. ↩

  21. E-mails of 21–22 December 2011. His “Are you on the island? I am on the boat in the area, and might be able to stop by in the afternoon…” of Wed, 21 Dec 2011 13:55:05 +0000 at EFTA00926264 p.1; Epstein’s “yes„ great anytime” of Wed, 21 Dec 2011 14:18:43 +0000 at EFTA00926265 p.1; “Will let you know soon” of Wed 12/21/2011 7:13:25 PM at EFTA01850076 p.1; “About 4:30” of Wed 12/21/2011 7:40:20 PM at EFTA01993834 p.1; “Heading there now” of Wed, 21 Dec 2011 20:27:45 +0000 at EFTA00628259 p.1 with two further copies; Epstein’s “I’m always there ,if yoU want to bOunce ideas” of Thu, 22 Dec 2011 09:05:48 +0000 at EFTA00925791 p.1; and his “Ok” of Thur 12/22/2011 11:56:37 AM at EFTA02022326 p.1. Epstein’s forward of the “About 4:30” message, Date: Wed, 21 Dec 2011 19:41:16 +0000, is at EFTA00925773 p.1, which carries two recipients, one of them barred or blank; nothing is supplied for it and the person forwarded to is not identified here. The thirty-six-second interval rests on the two explicitly zoned +0000 stamps 19:40:20 and 19:41:16. UNVERIFIED, from the text layer. The absence claim about an arrival was tested by searching the index for "Myhrvold" against "flight", "manifest", "Cruz Bay", "heli", "ferry", "LSJ" and "Little Saint James", and by reading every document in the union set dated in November and December 2011: no record of arrival was located. ↩

  22. E-mail, Nathan Myhrvold to Epstein, copying Claudia Leschuck, Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2012 16:59:02 +0000, “Come to my dinner paerty wednesday!” EFTA00929970 p.1, with copies at EFTA01770442 p.1 and EFTA01770267 p.2. The misspelling of “party” is the sheet’s. UNVERIFIED, from the text layer. ↩

  23. E-mail, Nathan Myhrvold to Epstein, copying Claudia Leschuck and Carolyn Zick, Date: Wed, 29 Feb 2012 15:47:57 +0000. EFTA00710139 p.1, with a copy at EFTA01772500 p.1. UNVERIFIED, from the text layer. ↩

  24. E-mail, Nathan Myhrvold to Epstein, Date: Sun, 25 Mar 2012 22:23:28 +0000, quoting beneath it Epstein’s “Would you tell paul alien , that if he is on the east coast or in the caribean I would like to hear his ideas on currency” — “alien” for “Allen” is the extraction’s. EFTA00659477 p.1, with a copy at EFTA01769925 p.1. UNVERIFIED, from the text layer. ↩

  25. E-mail, Nathan Myhrvold to Epstein, Date: Fri, 19 Apr 2013 19:05:02 +0000, answering “Leon black owns phaidon , he is doing food books.. How many hooks did you sell so far?” — the text layer gives “hooks” for “books” in the final question and it is printed here as it stands — EFTA00959419 p.1, with two further copies. UNVERIFIED, from the text layer. ↩

  26. E-mail, Nathan Myhrvold to Epstein, Date: Sat, 13 Jul 2013 13:56:18 +0000, answering Epstein’s one-line question of the previous evening. EFTA00717834 p.1, read at the image at 600 dpi, with a copy at EFTA01756898 p.1, UNVERIFIED. “Hmm” and “please keep this confidential” stand on one line on the sheet, joined by an ellipsis of five points, and are reproduced so; the text layer breaks at that ellipsis and drops it. The scientist the exchange concerns is named in Epstein’s quoted question and is not a subject of this page; the closing assessment quoted in the body is Myhrvold’s about that same man and about no one else, and the sheet’s account of the Media Lab is about the Lab and about others named on it. The assessments are Myhrvold’s own words and this page adopts none of them. ↩

  27. E-mail, Nathan Myhrvold to a distribution list, Subject “Essay”, Date: Thu, 04 Jul 2013 20:53:50 +0000, attachment name as the extraction gives it, damage and all: “Strategic_Terrorisms _Myhnyld_7-3-20 I 3.pd f”. EFTA00964649 p.1. The dinosaur circular, Subject “And now for somethnig completely different…”, Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2013 19:16:24 +0000, is at EFTA00979719 p.1; the misspelling in the subject line is the sheet’s. UNVERIFIED, from the text layer. ↩

  28. Two of the 331 sender documents carry the sender value “Nathan Myhrvold Bloomberg Column”: EFTA00687246 p.1, Date: Wed, 21 Dec 2011 18:51:26 +0000, Subject “Nathan Myhrvold: Invention Is the Mother of Economic Growth”, whose body opens “The following Bloomberg View column by Nathan Myhrvold appeared online December 19, 2011. To unsubscribe from this distribution list, please reply with “unsubscribe” in the subject line.”; and EFTA00930138 p.1, Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2012 20:41:27 +0000. These are a subscription list bearing his name, not messages he wrote to Epstein, and they are disclosed here rather than removed from the count, because the rule this page publishes counts them and a reader following it must reach the same 331. UNVERIFIED, from the text layer. ↩

  29. E-mails of 23 November 2013, all five messages standing stacked on one sheet: EFTA00976429 p.1, read at the image at 400 dpi. The top-level header is From: Nathan Myhrvold with the address barred, To: Jeffrey Epstein <[email protected]>, Subject: RE:, Date: Sat, 23 Nov 2013 15:15:20 +0000, body “Well, I can’t disagree with that…”. Beneath it stand, in order: Epstein’s of “11/23/2013 10:13 AM”, “it is not i who is currently in prison”; Myhrvold’s, attributed “On Sat, Nov 23, 2013 at 4:11 PM”, “Hmmm… That sounds more like the sex you get in federal prison…but I guess you’d know more about that than me.” followed on the image by a small yellow smiling-face emoji, which the extraction drops; Epstein’s of “11/23/2013 10:08 AM”, “not so fast kimo sabe. . its called fed sex. .”; Myhrvold’s, attributed “On Sat, Nov 23, 2013 at 4:07 PM”, “…pussy doesn’t FedEx well either! Some things you have to be there”; and Epstein’s of “11/23/2013 4:38 AM”, “thanks for the books. pistachio icecream didn’t make it”. The image prints “either!” where the extraction of the separate copy EFTA00976423 p.1 renders “eitherl”, and the reading above is the image’s. Separate copies of the two Myhrvold messages stand at EFTA00976423 p.1 and EFTA00976425 p.1, each with one further duplicate; those are UNVERIFIED. The two men’s stamps are on different clocks — his carry an explicit +0000 offset, Epstein’s are zoneless Outlook Sent: values — and no interval is asserted between them. The order rests on the stacking. ↩

  30. E-mail, Jeffrey Epstein to nathanm, Date: Thu, 07 Nov 2013 11:29:14 +0000. EFTA00975921 p.1, read at the image at 400 dpi. Quotation reproduced with the sheet’s printed double spacing and its own misspellings (“marial asset esatee”). Myhrvold’s reply, Date: Thu, 07 Nov 2013 13:31:00 +0000, “Yes it was fun!”, is at EFTA00975947 p.1 with one further copy, UNVERIFIED. ↩

  31. E-mails, Jeffrey Epstein to nathanm, Date: Fri, 08 Mar 2013 21:45:07 +0000, at EFTA00955943 p.1; Myhrvold’s reply of Sat, 09 Mar 2013 21:54:29 +0000 at EFTA00652619 p.1. UNVERIFIED, from the text layer. **The absence claim about money was tested by searching the union set for "Myhrvold" in conjunction with "invoice", "wire", "transfer", "retainer", "donation" and "Intellectual Ventures" with a currency figure, and by reading every returned document; no sum recording a payment, fee or transfer between them was located. The other sums the search returns are the cookbook prices Myhrvold quotes in his own message of 19 April 2013, the courier charges on the 2002 invoice, and the figures he names for other people’s business — “Not at all clear that this is where I would spend $1 billion” at EFTA01922747 p.1 and “HRH wants 35%” at EFTA02339079 p.1, both quoted in the body. ↩

  32. E-mails of 2 February 2014: Epstein’s, quoted beneath Myhrvold’s reply of Date: Sun, 02 Feb 2014 14:07:20 +0000 at EFTA00871030 p.1, with a copy at EFTA01937873 p.1. UNVERIFIED, from the text layer. ↩

  33. E-mails, Nathan Myhrvold to Epstein, Sent: Mon 6/2/2014 12:16:58 PM at EFTA01922747 p.1 and Sent: Mon 6/2/2014 12:20:49 PM at EFTA01922983 p.1, quoting Epstein’s “do you want to do this instead of google” of the same morning. UNVERIFIED, from the text layer. ↩

  34. E-mails: Epstein’s “I had some time with bill today, lets talk” quoted beneath Myhrvold’s reply of Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2014 12:21:41 +0000 at EFTA00684112 p.1; “you can ask bill tomonv re the donor advised fund plan. its intersting” quoted beneath his “ok” of Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2014 13:20:56 +0000 at EFTA00705788 p.1; “I will be in seatle on the 3rd, seeing bill at 330? you around?” quoted beneath his reply of Date: Fri, 30 May 2014 14:23:27 +0000 at EFTA00990404 p.1. The spellings are the sheets’ own. UNVERIFIED, from the text layer. ↩

  35. E-mails of 1–5 June 2014. Myhrvold’s “Have your people call mine, we will set up a lab visit, and you should come see my office. and bring” of Sun 6/1/2014 2:42:45 AM at EFTA02721759 p.1, and Epstein’s “i am going to leave her there,” quoted beneath his reply of Sun 6/1/2014 2:47:57 AM at EFTA01923459 p.1, both UNVERIFIED. Myhrvold’s reply of Date: Sun, 01 Jun 2014 22:53:33 +0000, EFTA00637339 p.1, and his message of Date: Thu, 05 Jun 2014 16:04:52 +0000, EFTA00706855 p.1, were both read at the image at 400 dpi. On the first, Epstein’s quoted message of Sunday, June 01, 2014 3:47 PM prints “i will only bring”, then a solid black bar, then “if you want”. On the second, the body prints “thanks for bringing”, a bar, then “I think she had a great time yesterday hanging out at the lab tasting food.”; the extraction of that sheet returns “thanks for bringing think she had a great time”, deleting both the bar and the word “I” and closing the gap. Both bars are the producing party’s and nothing is supplied for either. ↩

  36. E-mails of 10–13 August 2014: his “I have news! Will call you tomorrow” of Sunday, August 10, 2014 10:49 PM at EFTA02588154 p.1; his “Ok sensei…you are skilled in ways that I am not…” of Mon 8/11/2014 12:47:40 AM at EFTA01977855 p.1, quoting Epstein’s advice beneath it; Epstein’s “first three months take a vacation rental” of Mon, 11 Aug 2014 11:49:04 +0000 at EFTA00995279 p.1 and “feel free to call on me during this , what will be a unique period in your life. you are not disturbing me” of Mon, 11 Aug 2014 22:00:48 +0000 at EFTA00995305 p.1, both addressed To: nathanm; his “Great so fart Weird, but good…” of Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2014 19:04:31 +0000 at EFTA00633806 p.1. UNVERIFIED, from the text layer. The nature of the “news” is not stated on any sheet read for this page and is not supplied here; Epstein’s messages of the same days speak of a separation and of lawyers, and his own of 15 March 2014 and 8 March 2013 are in the same register. ↩

  37. E-mails: his “I would be happy to see her…” of Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2015 01:20:58 +0000 at EFTA00714678 p.1, quoting Epstein’s “kathy ruemmler . again is going to be in seatle. wed with nothing to do”; his message of Monday, February 16, 2015 2:46 PM, to Epstein and copying Kathy Ruemmler, at EFTA02388689 p.1, on which the extraction gives “we can =et together” and the quotation above restores the single missing character; “She said she is too busy” of Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2015 17:48:41 +0000 at EFTA00864051 p.1; “Separately, can I have Kathy Ruemmler’s email - I promised to send her the bioterror memo” of Monday, April 20, 2015 3:19 PM at EFTA02342775 p.1 — the extraction renders the possessive as an unresolved HTML entity broken by quoted-printable damage, “Kathy Ruemmler&#=9;s email”, and the apostrophe printed above is this page’s reading of it, not the sheet’s. The office schedule for 21 April 2015 reading “11:00-11:15am - Nathan Myhtvold . WIll stay till 12:50pm then Nathan has a meeting at Columbus Circle at 1pm / 12:00 m LUNCH w/Kath Ruemmler and Nathan M hrvold” is at EFTA00349871 p.1, the damaged spellings are the text layer’s and the sheet was not rendered to settle whether they stand on the paper; a second day-sheet at EFTA00634788 p.1 reads “11:30-12:45pm LUNCH w/7Vathan Myhrvold”. UNVERIFIED, from the text layer. A schedule establishes that a meeting was booked and not that it occurred. ↩

  38. E-mail, Nathan Myhrvold to Jeffrey Epstein, Subject “Saudi Guy”, Sent: Tuesday, April 25, 2017 10:50 PM. EFTA02339079 p.1. The sheet’s quoted-printable damage is printed as it stands: within the passage quoted above the = stands at six places, “a Sau=i guy”, “a deal=that is complicated”, “other things=(apparently”, “oil companies=and would like”, “which = am told” and “Since y=u have a friend there”. Each of the six is restored to a single character, and the six are not all of one kind: three take a letter (d, I, o) and the other three take a space. The restorations are not this page’s inference. The same message is quoted in the clear beneath Myhrvold’s own reply at EFTA00679087 p.1, and the passage above is that copy’s wording, word for word. That reply, Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2017 15:24:42 +0000, “Intellectual Ventures… nothing odd about that…”, itself quotes Epstein’s “my guy likes him. he asked me the name of your co. .? i told him id get back to him.” EFTA02652410 p.1 is not a copy of that reply: it is a further message in the same thread, Myhrvold’s “Ok great” of Sent: Wednesday, April 26, 2017 3:32 PM, which quotes the original message again in a different state of the same damage. UNVERIFIED, from the text layer. ↩

  39. E-mails: Epstein to a journalist, Date: Fri, 21 Apr 2017 16:59:03 +0000, “nathan myrhvold. suggested you use him as a refrence for masa”, at EFTA01048776 p.1 with five further copies; Epstein to a satellite entrepreneur, Date: Thu, 20 Apr 2017 10:35:38 +0000, at EFTA01048629 p.1; Myhrvold’s “Sort of…I have not talked to him in a couple years” of Date: Fri, 03 Mar 2017 19:14:08 +0000 at EFTA00685817 p.1 — the extraction renders the pronoun as a lower-case l, “Sort of…l have not talked”; the sheet was not rendered and the reading I is this page’s, not the sheet’s; his “Wow…i am in tokyo with Wyler to see Masa…” of Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2017 08:22:40 +0000 at EFTA00673472 p.1. The sheet last named also quotes a forward Epstein had sent to two named third parties; this page takes nothing from that forward, whose own content the extraction does not preserve. UNVERIFIED, from the text layer. ↩

  40. E-mail, Nathan Myhrvold to Epstein, Date: Mon, 29 Jun 2015 14:14:39 +0000, quoting beneath it Epstein’s message of the same morning beginning “I am there anytime you want to vent.” EFTA00852980 p.1, with one further copy. UNVERIFIED, from the text layer. ↩

  41. Office schedule for Saturday 7 October 2017, quoted inside a message at EFTA02226713 p.1, whose own heading the text layer gives without a space as “sat Oct 7.2017 NY”: “9:00am BREAKFAST w/Ehud … 1:00pm LUNCH w/Miroslav Lajcak … 2:00pm Appt w/Nathon Myhrvold”. Each elision marked … stands where the sheet prints a telephone number, which is outside this page’s scope. the spelling “Nathon” is the sheet’s. Lesley Groff’s confirmation of Wed 10/4/2017 1:12:12 PM, Subject “Nathan Myhryold”, body “Nathan Myrvold is confirmed to now come see you at 2pm on Sat. Oct. 7th! (this is in lieu of the dinner on Monday)” — three spellings of the surname on one sheet, two of them damaged — is at EFTA02225329 p.1. The scheduling thread with his assistant, EFTA02225735 p.1, is rendered and quoted at Miroslav Lajčák and is not re-described here. Epstein’s “your thoughts were very helpful yesterday thx” of Date: Sun, 08 Oct 2017 13:00:47 +0000 is at EFTA00996153 p.1. UNVERIFIED, from the text layer. ↩

  42. The 7–8 October 2017 thread. EFTA02587685 p.1, read at the image at 400 dpi: the header prints From: Nathan Myhrvold with the address barred, Sent: Saturday, October 7, 2017 11:42 PM, To: jeffrey E., Subject: Re: — a third value for the same message, the body above giving the quoting client’s 7:41 PM, and nothing converted; the body prints “Smart”, then two = marks, then, after a blank line, “thin tall =nbsp; short . dark hair?” — and no From:, Sent: or To: line stands anywhere between them. The = marks are ink on the paper. The twins carry the missing header: EFTA00995991 p.1, Date: Sun, 08 Oct 2017 00:05:08 +0000, prints Epstein’s “That’s contents, I was asking packaging” above “On Sat, Oct 7, 2017 at 7:41 PM Nathan Myhrvold < > wrote: / Smart”, and beneath that “From: Jeffrey E. / Sent: Saturday, October 7, 2017 18:10 / To: Nathan Myhrvold / Subject: / thin tall short . dark hair?”; EFTA00996153 p.1 prints the same block at “7:42 PM”. Epstein’s own copy of the question, sent at Saturday, October 7, 2017 10:11 PM on a different clock, stands alone at EFTA02587027 p.1. Those three are UNVERIFIED. The two stamps for the same message, “18:10” and “10:11 PM”, are a quoting client’s and a sending client’s respectively, neither carries a zone, and nothing here is converted. ↩

  43. E-mails of 9–10 October 2017. EFTA00992907 p.1, read at the image at 400 dpi: header From: Nathan Myhrvold with the address barred, To: "jeffrey E." <[email protected]>, Subject: Re:, Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2017 22:33:35 +0000, Inline-Images: Screen_Shot_2017-10-09_at_11.22.18_PM.png; body “I am leaving tomorrow am…maybe next time”. Beneath it stand Epstein’s message of “Tuesday, October 10, 2017 18:30”, whose body prints “your call.” followed by a short solid black bar; Myhrvold’s of “On Wed, Oct 11, 2017 at 12:28 AM”, “Very pretty!”; and Epstein’s of “Monday, October 9, 2017 17:23”, whose body is an empty ruled frame carrying a broken-image placeholder reading “Inline image 1”. The picture itself does not reproduce anywhere in this document. This page supplies nothing for the bar and makes no claim about who or what the image showed. His “Very pretty!” also stands alone at EFTA00992864 p.1, Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2017 22:28:40 +0000, UNVERIFIED. ↩

  44. E-mails of 23 July 2018: EFTA01004925 p.1, Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2018 14:09:11 +0000; EFTA01004933 p.1, Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2018 15:31:41 +0000, whose body the extraction renders “YESIIIII” and a twin at EFTA02600323 p.1 renders “YES11111”; EFTA01004942 p.1, Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2018 15:33:23 +0000, “MUCH WORSE”. The exclamation marks are reproduced here as marks because two extractions of the same sheet disagree on whether they are I or 1, and neither sheet was rendered. UNVERIFIED, from the text layer. ↩

  45. E-mail, Nathan Myhrvold to Epstein, Date: Thu, 30 Aug 2018 04:26:56 +0000. EFTA01026358 p.1, with a copy at EFTA02626183 p.1. UNVERIFIED, from the text layer. ↩

  46. E-mail, sender value nmyhrvold, to Epstein, Date: Mon, 01 Oct 2018 21:19:24 +0000. EFTA01021245 p.1, with a copy at EFTA02622698 p.1. His earlier “Is your island OK?” of Friday, September 8, 2017 12:53 AM is at EFTA02634783 p.1 and his “Well if you had to pick one to be not great, the island is the right choice…” of Friday, September 8, 2017 4:43 AM at EFTA02368199 p.1, where the extraction gives “the island is=the right choice” and the quotation above restores the single missing space. UNVERIFIED, from the text layer. ↩

  47. E-mail, Nathan Myhrvold to “Jeffrey E.”, Subject “New York!”, Sent: Friday, March 22, 2019 7:33 PM. EFTA02636308 p.1. The = in “wo=ld” is this production’s quoted-printable damage standing for one missing character and is printed here as the sheet gives it; the word is “would” and it is not mended in the quotation. No further copy of this message was located, and no reply to it was located. UNVERIFIED, from the text layer. The terminus claim was tested by re-running the sender rule over the whole 2,600-document union set and taking the maximum parsed top-level date: no sender document parses later than 22 March 2019. ↩

  48. Amended Complaint, Giuffre v. Dershowitz, No. 1:19-cv-03377-LAP (S.D.N.Y.), Exhibit A to Document 101-1, filed 20 December 2019. EFTA00092647 pp.28 and 30 of the PDF, internal pages 27 and 29, both read at the image at 400 dpi. Paragraph 79 is on PDF p.28 and paragraph 81(c) on PDF p.30, quoted above in full and verbatim. The pleading is a party’s allegation and not a finding of any court, and the only proposition in it about Myhrvold is the one quoted: that his name was advanced by the defendant in settlement negotiations and rejected by the plaintiff on being shown photographs. ↩

  49. Complaint, Giuffre v. Dershowitz, No. 1:19-cv-03377 (S.D.N.Y.), filed 16 April 2019, paragraph 70, at HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017953 p.1, which is page 19 of 28 of the filing and carries the same allegation in the original complaint’s wording. UNVERIFIED, from the text layer. The dismissal of 9 November 2022, Giuffre’s statement that she “may have made a mistake in identifying Mr. Dershowitz”, and Dershowitz’s responses are set out and sourced at Virginia Giuffre and Alan Dershowitz; this page does not re-derive them and asserts nothing about them. ↩

  50. Reply Declaration of Alan M. Dershowitz in Further Support of Motion to Intervene and Unseal, Giuffre v. Maxwell, No. 15-cv-07433 (S.D.N.Y.), Document 1218-49, filed 15 July 2021, paragraph 21. EFTA02786934 p.9, with copies at EFTA02794403 p.9 and EFTA02800947 p.9. UNVERIFIED, from the text layer. ↩

Backlinks